Clinton campaign paid to 'infiltrate' Trump Tower, White House servers to link Trump to Russia: Durham
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
First on Fox: Clinton campaign lawyers paid a tech company to 'infiltrate' servers belonging to Trump Tower, then the White House, to establish an 'inference' and 'narrative' to bring to government agencies linking Donald Trump to Russia, Special Counsel John Durham's brief says.
Durham filed a petition Feb. 11 focused on potential conflicts of interest related to representing former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussman, who was charged with making a false statement to a federal agent. Sussman pleaded not guilty.
The indictment against Sussman says he told then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016, less than two months before the 2016 presidential election, that he was not working "for no client" when he requested and held a meeting in which he presented "purported data and 'white papers' that allegedly demonstrated a secret communication channel" between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin.
But Durham's Feb. 11 filing, in a section titled "Factal Background," reveals that Sussman "collected and forwarded the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a US-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign."
Durham's filing says Sussman's "billing records reflect" that he "repeatedly billed the Clinton campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations."
Special Advisor John H. Durham
The filing revealed that Sussman and the Tech Executive met and communicated with another legal partner, who served as general counsel for the Clinton campaign. Sources told Fox News that the lawyer is Marc Elias, who worked at the law firm Perkins Coie.
Durham's filing indicates that in July 2016, the tech executive worked with Sussman, a US investigative firm retained by Law Firm 1 on behalf of the Clinton campaign, numerous cyber researchers and employees of several Internet companies to "assemble the purported data and white papers". "
"As part of these efforts, Tech Executive-1 leveraged its access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data," the filing states. "Tech Executive-1 also brought in researchers from a US university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of internet data as part of an ongoing federal government cybersecurity research contract."
"Tech Executive-1 commissioned these researchers to mine internet data to establish 'inference' and 'narrative' linking then-candidate Trump to Russia," Durham says. "In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that it was seeking to please certain 'VIPs', referring to individuals from Law Firm-1 and the Clinton campaign."
Former U.S. President Bill Clinton and First Lady Hillary Clinton arrive for Trump's presidential inauguration at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC, U.S. January 20, 2017.
(REUTERS/Saul Loeb/Pool)
Durham also writes that during Sussman's trial, the government would establish that among the Internet Tech Executive-1 and associates exploited data was domain name system (DNS) Internet traffic relating to "(i) a health care provider particular health, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump's Central Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executive Office of the President of the United States (EOP)."
Durham says the internet company Tech Executive-1 worked for "came in to access and maintain dedicated servers" for the president's executive office as part of a "sensitive deal whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the 'EOP'.
"Tech Executive-1 and its associates exploited this arrangement by mining EOP DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump," Durham says.
The filing also reveals that Sussman provided "an updated set of allegations," including Russian banking data, and additional allegations regarding Trump "to a second US government agency" in 2017.
Durham says the allegations "were based, in part, on purported DNS traffic" that Tech Executive-1 and others "gathered relating to Trump Tower, Donald Trump's apartment building in New York, EOP and the aforementioned health care provider".
During Sussman's meeting with the second US government agency, Durham said he "provided data which he believed reflected allegedly suspicious DNS lookups by these Internet Protocol (IP) address entities affiliated with a Russian cellphone provider," and claimed that the research "demonstrated Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare Russian-made cordless phones near the White House and other locations."
Pedestrians walk past the Trump Tower building, Tuesday, July 7, 2020, in New York. (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II)
"The Office of the Special Counsel identified no support for these allegations," Durham wrote, adding that "research was far from sparse in the United States."
"For example, the more comprehensive data that Tech Executive-1 and his associates collected - but did not provide to Agency 2 - shows that between approximately 2014 and 2017 there were a total of more than 3 million Russian phone lookups - Prover 1 IPs from US-based IPs," Durham wrote. "Less than 1,000 of those searches came from IP addresses affiliated with Trump Tower."
Durham added that data collected by Tech Executive-1 also revealed that research began as early as 2014, during the Obama administration and years before Trump took office, which he said is "another fact that the allegations omitted".
"During his meeting with Agency-2 employees, the defendant also made a materially similar misrepresentation to the one he made to the FBI's General Counsel," Durham wrote. "In particular, the defendant asserted that he did not represent any particular client in conveying the above allegations."
"In truth and in fact, the defendant represented Tech Executive-1 - a fact that the defendant later admitted under oath during December 2017 testimony before Congress, without identifying the client by name," wrote Durham.
Former Chief Investigator of the Trump-Russia Inquiry for the House Intelligence Committee under the former Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., Kash Patel, said the record "definitely shows that Hillary Clinton's campaign directly funded and ordered her lawyers at Perkins Coie to orchestrate a criminal enterprise to fabricate a connection between the President Trump and Russia".
"According to Durham, this arrangement was put in place in July 2016, which means that Hillary Clinton's campaign and her lawyers orchestrated the most complex and coordinated plot against Trump when he was both candidate and later President of the United States while simultaneously perpetuating the fake Steele Dossier Hoax," Patel told Fox News, adding that the attorneys worked to "infiltrate" the servers at Trump Tower and the White House.
The anti-Trump dossier, written by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, commissioned by opposition research firm Fusion GPS, was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign through the Elia's law firm, Perkins Coie.
Patel added that Sussman relayed the "false narrative" to US government agencies "in hopes they would launch investigations into President Trump."
Sussmann's indictment is the second prosecution to emerge from Durham's investigation.
Sussman Photo: Perkins Coie
(Perkins Coie)
In 2020, Durham accused former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith of making a false statement - the first criminal case to arise from his investigation. Clinesmith has been referred for potential prosecution by the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General, which conducted its own review of the Russia investigation.
Specifically, the inspector general accused Clinesmith, though not by name, of altering an email about Page to say he was "not a source" for another government agency. Page said he was a source for the CIA. The DOJ relied on that claim when it submitted a third and final renewal request in 2017 to listen to Trump campaign aide Carter Page under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). .
Former Attorney General Bill Barr appointed Durham, then a US attorney from Connecticut, in 2019 to investigate the origins of the original FBI Russia investigation, or Crossfire Hurricane, which began in July 2016, with the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller in May 2017 shortly. after Mueller completed his years-long investigation into whether Trump's campaign colluded or coordinated with Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election.
Mueller's investigation found no evidence of illegal or criminal coordination between Trump or the Trump campaign and Russia in 2016.
Barr in December 2020, before leaving the Trump administration, hired Durham as special counsel to continue his investigation through the Biden administration.
In the scope order, Barr said Durham "is authorized to investigate whether any federal official, employee or other person or entity has violated the law in connection with intelligence, counter -espionage or law enforcement directed against the 2016 Presidential Election campaigns, individuals associated with such campaigns, and individuals associated with the administration of President Donald J. Trump, including but not limited to , Crossfire Hurricane, and Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller's Investigation, III.
Under the U.S. code, the special advocate would produce a "confidential report" and is required to "submit to the Attorney General a final report and such interim reports as he deems appropriate in a form that will permit public release."
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
66 visitors
Uh oh .... Chongo!
Think that will end her 2024 Presidential ambitions?
What ambitions? She hasn't even hinted she would run again. Kremlin Karlson sure tells you what you want to hear doesn't he?
Assume you are referring to Nikki, Nikki, Nikki?
You are always free to assume whatever silly thing you wish.
Some people actually make assumptions based on facts.
Not the ones engaged in silly conspiracy theories, though.
Assume? You know what they say about people who do that…
Without exception something asinine.
[deleted]
[deleted]
deleted
[deleted]
[ask Sparty On]
Truth.
Only off topic posts and/or responses in context were removed. As usual, there is no truth in the “truth” comment above.
SOSDD
Then it was by accident.
And that only because it wasn't true either.
She has never even been charged with a crime after 23 years of reich wing witch hunts but this is the one that is going to put her in irons.. Lol.. Sure, ok. [eye roll]
Are you denying that the Clinton campaign funded and promoted the Russia/Trump collusion hoax? You and the 8 ?
Did the Clinton campaign think there was something going on between Trump and Russia? Yes. Did they push for an investigation? Yes. Was there something going on? Yes. Was it criminal conspiracy? Criminal conspiracy was never proven. Does that mean the investigation was unwarranted? Of course not, we needed the investigation to confirm there was no criminal conspiracy among the dozens of proven connections and clearly inappropriate contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives.
The Trump campaign and Russian cooperation is not a hoax, it's a fact. The investigation proved that beyond any sort of reasonable doubt. What they were unable to prove is "criminal conspiracy" which is a much higher bar.
So was the investigation a "hoax"? Of course not, there were many verified connections between Russian operatives and the Trump campaign that rightly should have been investigated.
The fallacy in your arguments is that it isn’t an opposition political campaigns job to investigate such alleged criminal activity. Especially of a sitting president. There are plenty of federal agencies to do that.
Your argument is a complete fail .....
and Joffe says he was a volunteer data gatherer for the Obama Administration and accepted no compensation from either Sussman or Clinton and dropped it when Trump was elected.
Hence the statements indicating that anyone was paid to spy on a sitting POTUS are just Tucker's
hallucinations and lies, as usual.
The investigation is ongoing and accelerating ...... all anyone really needs to know. Its going to continue getting real sporty out there for Hillary sycophants.
Better buckle up buttercups.
And how many "committed suicide" to make sure those charges aren't filed?
In the Whitewater case it was Clinton associates who were convicted as a result of the Whitewater scandal. The Clintons' partners in the deal, James and Susan McDougal, each went to prison. James McDougal received a 3.5-year sentence for fraud. He died in a federal prison in 1998. Susan McDougal received an 18-month sentence on charges of contempt of court for refusing to answer questions about the Clintons' involvement in the affair.
Hillary Clinton worked hard to distance herself from the work she did at Madison Guaranty. Here's why:
1. It was a corrupt operation used as a milk cow by its proprietors for the benefit of themselves and their friends and associates, including Bill and Hillary Clinton.
2. By working on Madison's Castle Grande project, Mrs. Clinton was assisting in a fraudulent sham designed to deceive the bank examiners.
3. By not disclosing her partnership with the McDougals, Mrs. Clinton violated conflict of interest rules and exposed the Rose Law Firm to potential malpractice suits.
4. Her work for Madison involved obtaining rulings from regulatory agencies, and the fact that she was the wife of the Governor may have influenced the decisions.
Some here are proud of the fact that Hillary always got away with it.
She's made it a habit of hiding behind political affiliates to get away with things. It's looking like those affiliates don't exist now and hopefully this will come to the rightful end it needs to.
With the sheer amount of Teflon on her back, it's a wonder she can walk!
Probably the same amount of gay men that Obama killed.
/S
Gay men that Obama killed? That's a foil hat wearing level conspiracy theory.
So is thinking that the Clinton's had any body killed or "commit suicide"
( I guess you missed the /S )
As bad as Watergate. Actually, worse if I'm reading this correctly. Nixon just wanted information, Clinton apparently planted false information. As if the Steele dossier wasn't bad enough. The amount of damage she's done to our republic is incalculable.
Any chance you fell for the "I'm like a really smart guy" thing too?
Helsinki! Putin!
Any other deflections you want throw in to avoid the topic?
Answer the question. And Helsinki is real. This slander article is not.
Why, yes, yes, Helsinki IS a real place.
What isn't real is all the drama you have managed to pack into a meeting which took place there--a meeting you claim is nefarious, but amazingly, YEARS later, here we all are just WAITING for a scintilla of truth to what you say.
Helsinki must be what some liberals cry when cornered and left without coherent arguments.
Spot on. [deleted]
Nixon should have never resigned. His crimes were like a tea party compared to this.
Amazing anyone is brainwashed enough to defend Clinton on it .....
much worse than watergate. High treason is what it really is
We still have feeble minded people who believe it.
Durham discovered all this nearly five months ago. Why hasn't he "locked her up" ? LOL
Mainly because he discovered nothing.
The small players always go first. If even the faintest trace of justice lingers in the nation’s capital then all who perpetrated Russiagate & Spygate - US history’s gravest criminal political conspiracy - will be unsparingly investigated, audited, exposed, deposed, subpoenaed, prosecuted & punished in a court of law.
After Republicans have set the precedent I doubt that's likely.
Well there's a whole lot of horse shit. Fact: Trump and his campaign welcomed Russian aid. Fact: Trumps campaign managers high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services "represented a grave counterintelligence threat" according to a Republican Senate investigation. Fact: Trump associates were eager to exploit the Kremlin’s aid, particularly by maximizing the impact of the disclosure of Democratic emails hacked by Russian intelligence officers. Fact: Russia did hack Democratic email servers and illegally released campaign emails with the intent to hurt the Democrat candidate. Fact: Putin admitted that he wanted President Trump to win the election and did direct Russian officials to help Trump which included spending $1.25M a month on fake social media ads and videos that appeared to be domestic in origin.
The investigation into Trump was both warranted and essential. Just because they never found an audio tape of Trump telling Putin in specific terms what he would do to return the favor doesn't mean there was no cooperation and coordination between Trump and the Russians, it merely means they were not able to prove criminal conspiracy. But the fact remains, there was more than enough smoke to warrant the investigation. Claiming the investigation was somehow the "gravest criminal political conspiracy" is beyond fucking nuts, you would have to be either a complete brain dead moron or a hilariously gullible conservative rube to believe that kind of horse shit.
Yep, as the saying goes, the fecal material always rolls downhill!
Because HRC has a huge amount of Teflon coating on her back, causing all the crap to slide right off!
This seed is the hands down winner of the 'Gas Lighting' award for the month.
You got 'William', the author to this garbage, citing 'revelations' that were in the original indictment. Then, hilariously, 'William' quotes Kash Patel, who has proven ad nauseam, that he's a moronic Trump sycophant to explain the filing.
The fucking filing is about an alleged conflict of interest with one of Sussman's attorneys. It contains no NEW allegations, NONE.
Durham is tapdancing as fast as he can, he's trying to delay the trial until July and this is just more crap thrown at the wall.
Awesome gaslighting gambit .... using an accusation of gaslighting.
Classic.
Another 'I know what you are, what am I' response.
Your seed is a sad and failed attempt at manipulation Sparty.
Your comments are sad attempts to perpetuate it.
BTFW, if all of the 'worse than Watergate' criminal conspiracy is true, Durham should be fired for incompetence for failing to indict all of these alleged conspirators.
Where is the criminal indictment for 'Tech Executive-1' Sparty?
How about the criminal indictments for the principles employed by:
the 'company that assisted Tech Executive-1' or
the 'researchers at a U.S.-based university' or
the 'Internet Company-1' or
the 'Internet Company-2 or
the 'Internet Company-3'?
ALL of those entities [and more 'conspirators'] are cited in the ORIGINAL indictment from SEPTEMBER of 2021 Sparty.
Hell, Durham hasn't even indicted Sussman for this conspiracy you and yours allege.
Nope
Wrong
Guess again
that would true if the investigation was complete but since it is not .... once again ...... you are wrong
Apparently this is a revelation to the worker drones over on the left but again, see above.
The investigation is not over.
You’ll be made to eat crow soon enough. And it will be ice cold .....
These are the same people who accuse Trump of being guilty of all sorts of crimes even though he's never been indicted.
Projection.
YOUR seed, you and yours are ALL desperate to ignore the actual content of Durham's filing and instead cut and paste single words and short phrases to try and support a sad ideological agenda.
Well since Durham has an open-ended mandate, the 'investigation' may NEVER be over.
They tried to pull that 'we want to keep the case open because we might find evidence some day' bullshit with Andrew McCabe, it failed, and he was reinstated in good standing and is receiving his pension.
If Durham was going to get indictments from LAST YEARS grand jury, they would have happened by now. Your seed claims that Durham has a plethora of evidence of y'all's alleged conspiracy. Didn't Patel convince you?
BTW Sparty, you said that they were 'caught spying on Trump'. If they were 'caught' and Durham presented that evidence to his grand jury, why no indictments?
The posits in your seed are illogical hyperbolic gaslighting.
By whom Sparty? You?
Delusional.
Time will tell ..... after the investigation is over. Not before. it’ll be fun watching Hillary sycophants try to spin their way out of this one when the evil ones intent comes to light
Really fun
Gee, do you remember when we were told to "just be patient--Mueller isn't done yet"?
LOL!
Yet you chose to post this seed that insists that Durham 'has the receipts' instead of waiting and now you insist that I wait for the proof of all of the allegations you and yours have made.
Again, juvenile.
Okay. For starters, show where this has been alleged, previously. "Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the [Executive Office of the President] for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.”
Here you go Sean.
READ the fucking filing that the seed pretends is so revelatory.
In each and every instance where allegations are made, it is predicated with 'The Indictment also alleges':
Microsoft Word - Conflicts-Motion-7.docx (courtlistener.com)
THEN you can READ the DOJ's Sussman indictment from SEPTEMBER 2021 and find the EXACT SAME allegation verbatim:
U.S. v. Michael A. Sussman (justice.gov)
Those are facts easily garnered by any member with a curious mind and a desire for having the facts BEFORE commenting.
You are welcome.
No it doesn't. Why are you making things up? You should read your sources before citing them.
Cite the Paragraph.
Yes it does. BTFW, if you can't find it in the indictment, how can you make that proclamation about it from the filing?
I'm not Sean.
Unlike YOU, I did.
I know you have issues with copying and pasting block quotes but surely you can manage to do a simple search of the term Sean.
Or, you could say please, and I just might hold your hand AGAIN.
Actually, no. Since you chose to be supercilious, I'm done holding your hand Sean.
Find it yourself, I did.
Classic Dulay. You get caught making false representations about a source and double down on your dishonesty.
Any member with a curious mind and a desire for honesty will see that the motion contains different factual allegations than the indictment. Reading is fundamental.
Unlike YOU, I did.
I was being charitable by claiming you didn't read them. The alternative is that you did and are intentionally mispresenting their contents.
o. Since you chose to be supercilious, I'm done holding your hand Sean.
Given you track record of mendacity as documented above, why would anyone believe you?
Instead of all the posturing and deflecting, just cite the paragraph.
Classic Sean, making personal comments without posting an iota of evidence.
I'm over giving you and yours a pass for spewing unfounded vitriol.
So Sean, post a block quote from the 'motion' that 'contains different factual allegations than the indictment'.
You can't because it doesn't.
Again, personal comments without evidence.
Sean, your proclamations do not qualify as documentation of anything other than your personal animus.
So, you made all of your personal comments about me being 'dishonest' yet you STILL haven't been able to find the allegation in the original indictment.
I posted the fucking links to BOTH documents Sean. That's NOT posturing or deflecting, that's inserting empirical FACTS into the discussion. Your whole 'your dishonesty' screed is predicated on your inability to do a simple search of a legal document. You've proclaimed that the 'motion contains different factual allegations than the indictment' without the ability to do the research required to support your statement. So who is being 'dishonest' here Sean?
Again, post a block quote from the motion that makes NEW allegations Sean.
WHEN you don't, be assured that I will be pointing out your dishonesty, so that any member with a curious mind and a desire for honesty will see.
I already did.
u've proclaimed that the 'motion contains different factual allegations than the indictment' without the ability to do the research required to support your statemen
Now this is when you descend into farce . You refuse to cite the specific paragraph in the complaint that supposedly contains the verbatim allegation despite multiple requests to do so, yet demand I provide additional specific evidence. Do you even realize how hypocritical you are? All I need to is say "read the fucking links" and I've supported my argument to the exact extent you have.
SO I could, if i were like you, just stop and point to both documents and say read them. Because anyone who does understands I am correct. But because I am nice guy, I already pointed to one specific allegation and you haven't been able to provide any evidence to support your claim, despite multiple requests.
t a block quote from the motion that makes NEW allegations Sean.
Like teaching a toddler, I'm starting small before moving up. I've pointed out one. You've done nothing but posture and bloviate while ignoring it. Once you provide the "EXACT SAME allegation verbatim" like you promised, I'll post another one. That's how this works. Your hysterics don't give you a pass.
Why post bullshit Sean. Everyone here can see that you haven't posted anything from the motion or the indictment.
Again, who is being dishonest here Sean?
More bullshit.
I CHALLENGE you to provide ANY evidence Sean. You continue to fallaciously blame ME for your inability to provide it.
Do you even realize that YOU are the one being hypocritical?
Again Sean, I provided links, you have provided NOTHING.
You copied and pasted a truncated quote from the seed so don't try to pretend that you've done one iota of research.
I provided evidence by posting the links to BOTH documents. Instead of adulting, you demand that I hold your hand and copy and paste the same wording from the indictment.
What would ME posting a quote from a document that you already have in front of your PROVE Sean? Hint: Not a fucking thing.
Why do I say 'not a fucking thing? Because without an empirical connection, i.e. having the allegation highlighted in front of you in both documents, you would just be taking MY word it.
And you've made your opinion of MY veracity abundantly clear with multiple derogatory comments, haven't you Sean?
You need not take MY word for it; you can achieve the empirical connection for yourself Sean. I furnished you with BOTH documents. Just as I did, YOU can search for the 'one specific allegation' you cited in BOTH documents and garner the FACTS for yourself.
Yet instead of doing so, you came here whining about ME not holding your hand and claiming that my challenging YOU adult and do your own research somehow proves that I am dishonest.
Your comments are the equivalent of a toddler having a tantrum.
Lol. At least try and maintain the same argument longer than a couple posts. That's how you argue honestly.
From your first response to me, when I pointed out a new allegation in the motion": THEN you can READ the DOJ's Sussman indictment from SEPTEMBER 2021 and find the EXACT SAME allegation verbatim:
And now you try and claim it's not in the indictment.
So, again, where's that allegation, verbatim no less, in the indictment? How many times now have I asked you to back up what you claimed in your first response?
And rather than back up your claim all you do is call names, whine and deflect.
Just cite the verbatim allegation from the indictment that you claimed existed in your post 6.2.1 or admit you were being dishonest and then we can move on.
I'll wait.
Strawman, I made no such claim.
YOU posted:
I replied:
See that Sean? YOU made a claim that there are DIFFERENT factual allegations in the motion that are NOT in the indictment. You FAILED to post ANYTHING to 'back up' your claim.
It drips with hypocrisy.
You keep claiming, WITHOUT evidence, that the 'one specific allegation' that you cited isn't in the indictment, merely because YOU are incapable of finding it for yourself.
AGAIN:
I provided evidence by posting the links to BOTH documents. Instead of adulting, you demand that I hold your hand and copy and paste the same wording from the indictment.
What would ME posting a quote from a document that you already have in front of your PROVE Sean? Hint: Not a fucking thing.
Why do I say 'not a fucking thing? Because without an empirical connection, i.e. having the allegation highlighted in front of you in both documents, you would just be taking MY word it.
And you've made your opinion of MY veracity abundantly clear with multiple derogatory comments, haven't you Sean?
In the HOURS that you have been here whining and demanding that I hold your hand, YOU could have adulted and searched the documents for yourself.
And yes Sean, it IS in the indictment VERBATIM.
Instead, members here can see that you'd rather whine than educate yourself.
I am not the one calling names, whining or deflecting here Sean.
Oh, and BTFW Sean, I won't be 'moving on' from your unfounded and demeaning comments about me. I'm done giving such fallacious vitriol a pass. Are you a member of HD?
Here we go again. Dulay goes into frantically throwing shit at the wall mode to distract from his dishonest posting. A familiar sight. Since he can't make an honest argument, he resorts to trying to wear down his audience through frustration. All of these replies and he still can't respond to the post: "show where this has been alleged, previously. "Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the [Executive Office of the President] for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.”
5 responses, countless wasted words, and not a single citation to where one can supposedly "find the EXACT SAME allegation verbatim:" as he promised in his original response. First he claims, It's in the indictment. A few posts later, it's not, now again he claims it's in the indictment verbatim. Yet again, no citation. Just flailing and insults because he knows he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Will he go to 10 posts? 20? 30? All he has to do is provide a single little citation (unless of course, he's lying because it doesn't exist) and then we can move on the other allegations contained in the motion but not in the complaint. But he doesn't do that. He just whines and offers conclusions without support.
Why lie Sean?
Every member here can clearly see that I DID post 'citations'. I posted the link to BOTH court documents.
I'm done with you and your comments full of bullshit lies.
Move on Sean.
. I posted the link to BOTH court documents
Cite the actual page and paragraph. That's how you cite something in a multiple page document.
6 responses now. You've wasted all this time and energy and instead of simply citing to an allegation that supposedly exists. All it would have taken is one little citation to the "exact same allegation verbatim" in the indictment to move on. Instead six lengthy posts without a single citation. It's so easy to do.
Unless, of course, the "exact same allegation verbatim" from the indictment doesn't exist. That would explain your refusal to provide an actual citation.
Regardless, it looks like the investigation is finally lowering the boom. Our friends on the left will really be spinning like whirling dervishes then ....
Found the cite to that yet?
Still waiting for that cite..
It's almost like you [deleted] and can't back it up.....
I especially like the gaslighting by making accusations of gaslighting gambit.
A new low in the war of words ......
Why July?
Ask your avatar.
The seeder seems to think that whatever this thing is shows criminal behavior on the part of Hillary Clinton. The FBI did not initiate Investigation of the Trump campaign based on information from Hillary Clinton. The Trump Campaign was investigated because of it's own actions. The Trump campaign was willing and eager to receive help from the Russians against Clinton in the 2016 election. One way we can know this is that Trump repeated the same behavior for the next election of 2020 when he asked another foreign government, Ukraine to help him under handedly undermine the Biden campaign. The Idea that Trump Is somehow an innocent aggrieved party in all this is completely absurd.
Nah but what is absurd is how some can’t seem to make the connection. The campaign that lost to Trump, the opposition, spied on a sitting President. This after getting caught spying on him during the campaign.
It is simply insane that some refuse to make the connection
Insane
You know who can't 'make the connection'?
Durham.
Again, WHERE are the indictments for those who were 'caught spying' Sparty?
Yawn .... again .... the investigation is not over but when it is the left will have to get their spin doctoring really spooled up. To protect their evil chosen one. The one Trump had the temerity to beat like a rented mule.
Thus began the era of chronic butthurt and TDS on the left ..... and it all goes back to the evil one. Hillary.
[Deleted] We have been over this time after time
Trump was not investigated by the FBI because of what Hillary Clinton wanted. This is all on the record. And Trump wanted help in the 2020 election because he had gotten help from a foreign government in the 2016 election. Denial will not change that.
Last chance to get on topic John, the seed is about Clinton spying on Trump. Feel free to discuss that. Further off topic posts will be removed.
[removed]
For the moment let's stipulate that Hillary Clinton wanted to investigate Donald Trump. why do you think that was? Could it possibly be because Trump had asked Russia to hack into Clinton's computer , among other things?
Because she is a lying bitch and was afraid "her turn" wasn't going to happen even though Democrats were convinced that she would easily win, only to see her and their hopes dashed when she blew a sure thing.
Trump never asked Russia to hack Hillary's computer, why are you sticking to that LIE?
Not her job.
She’s knows government better than most and like the rest of us could have reported her suspicions to the appropriate authorities. Let them do “their” job.
And yet, she didn’t and then tried to hide what she did Not the actions of an innocent person.
Not even close.
So, you and yours are just posting unfounded proclamations and expect them to get a pass.
Juvenile.
Wow, that is a hilarious comment Sparty.
The allegations in your seed are that Hillary Clinton paid for all of this, INCLUDING paying Sussman for reporting the information to 'Agency-1' and 'Agency-2'.
Your comment illustrates a galactic ignorance of the topic.
I'll leave it to 'our readers' to decide who has posted obtuse and bias content vs. who has posted informed replies and facts.
No problem for me. None at all ....
As I’ve said several times, I’m gonna enjoy watching Hillary sycophants trying to spin their way out of this one.
For them I’m sure the usual denial, insults and gaslighting will be the spin du jour. SOSDD.
Yawn....
Just for you.
You make that sound as if it's fact. When, reality, you know it is false. The Meuller investigation proved you wrong. Yet here you are running with it.
Still not making the connection ..... amazing!
Still can't stop posting 'last word' irrelevant comments.
Please proceed.
Lol ....now on to the the last word gambit in a sophomoric attempt to get the last word. How sad for you ...
On her own?
Imagine controlling the President's server?
Because she wanted and was probably desperate for any dirt or edge she get on Trump to get ahead. Clinton is no stranger to back alley backstabbing tactics. Still backfired on her because she still lost.
But the bottom line is still that the opposition did it so that's okay and gets the proverbial pass by the hard core liberal left!
So John thinks there was nothing wrong with the Nixon campaign breaking into the Watergate Hotel.
That is not the reason cited by the corrupt FBI.
Actually Vic, the Mueller report states just that.
States what specifically?
Are you having issues following the thread Vic?
That the Trump campaign was willing and eager to receive help from the Russians against Clinton in the 2016 election.
Maybe the problem lies with you?
Do you remember when John Brennan told Obama and his gang that Hillary Clinton was pushing a Russia/Trump collusion hoax?
Here Dulay:
What problem are you talking about Vic?
Wow Vic, a BREAKING EXCLUSIVE revelation from SEPTEMBER 2020.
Oh and BTFW, there is NO evidence of your characterization of what Brennen told Obama. Why not just rely on the facts in your link rather than make shit up?
Oh and do you remember when I asked you what law you claim that Clinton violated? That was only yesterday. Got an answer Vic?
I gave you the link. How many ways can you interpret that? Why not join the entire universe and admit that Hillary Clinton had the Russia collusion thing made up?
And further evidence of there being none so blind as those who will not see.
Thank you for admitting that it's an interpretation and NOT an empirical fact.
Did Hillary Clinton make up the Don Jr.'s Trump Tower meeting with the Russian lawyer Vic?
Did she make up Flynn's phone calls with the Russian ambassador?
Did she make up the Flynn's interactions with Putin et al?
I'm curious, are you claiming the Russia/Trump collusion investigation is a "hoax" because the investigation wasn't able to prove criminal conspiracy?
There were nine Republican led congressional investigations into Benghazi, Hillary and her email server and no criminality was ever found, does that mean the Benghazi investigation was a hoax? Does that mean you'd define the Hillary private email server investigation a hoax? Is that all it takes to call an investigation a hoax? To not find criminality?
The Russia/Trump collusion investigation found that Russia did in fact launch " an aggressive effort to interfere in the election on Trump’s behalf. It says the Trump campaign chairman had regular contact with a Russian intelligence officer and says other Trump associates were eager to exploit the Kremlin’s aid, particularly by maximizing the impact of the disclosure of Democratic emails hacked by Russian intelligence officers".
" The findings , including unflinching characterizations of furtive interactions between Trump associates and Russian operatives, echo to a large degree those of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and appear to repudiate the Republican president’s claims that the FBI had no basis to investigate whether his campaign was conspiring with Russia ."
" Manafort’s high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik, represented a grave counterintelligence threat ,” the report says.
Shall we compare that to what they found against Hillary Clinton?
" Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."
Clinton was "careless" and conservative Republicans demand she be "locked up", yet Trump and his campaign "represented a grave counterintelligence threat" and conservative Republicans shrug their shoulders and call it all a hoax.
I'm calling it a hoax because if Robert Mueller had a half a brain he would have known that there wasn't any collusion within one month of the launch of his investigation.
That's pretty funny Vic because Durham has all of the other prior investigation's evidence in front of him, has had a mandate since 2019 and STILL all he's got against his 'big fish' are trumped up [pun intended] charges.
I guess that means that Durham only has a quarter of a brain. You must be proud.
The seeder is now deleting comments that contradict his silly narrative
That looks to be a LIE. Looks like a site moderator deleted your off-topic comments.
Be honest.
Nope, he was warned and went off topic anyway. Damn right I reported his off topic post. Whining about it is just sophomoric.
Further off topic post will get reported well. He can go shit on someone else’s seed.
I’ve got a great memory and remember her calls to “resistance” after she lost. None of that gets reported in the propaganda wing of the Democrat party. The mass media.
All this shit goes back to Hillary. She’s an evil fucker. Makes Trump look like a choirboy.
More projection.
Wrong again ..... amazing.
I get tired of going through this shit a hundred times
These people are delusional.
And yet here you are making yourself tired
As you and yours love to say, my comment was spot on and I stand by it.
Problem is, that once again you are wrong, dead wrong.... incredible!
Actually, the problem here is that you incessantly post bias partisan bullshit without a basis in fact and try to pretend that it's relevant and revelatory.
Wow, you are still completely wrong ..... unbelievable!
Thread @8 locked for meta
EXCLUSIVE: Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe met with Special Counsel John Durham on more than one occasion and told him there was evidence in intelligence to support the indictments of "multiple people" in his investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe , sources told Fox News.
Fox News first reported on Durham's latest filing, which alleged that lawyers from Hillary Clinton 's presidential campaign in 2016 had paid to "infiltrate" servers belonging to Trump Tower and later the White House, in order to establish an "inference" and "narrative" to bring to federal government agencies linking Donald Trump to Russia .
But sources told Fox News this week that during his meetings with Durham, Ratcliffe, who served as a congressman and as the former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Texas, said he believed there was "enough evidence" in those materials that he provided to indict "multiple people."
The sources pointed to one key piece of declassified intelligence, which Fox News first reported in October 2020, revealing that intelligence community officials within the CIA forwarded an investigative referral on Hillary Clinton purportedly approving "a plan concerning U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server."
Sources told Fox News that the CIA memo, also known as a Counterintelligence Operational Lead (CIOL), was properly forwarded to the FBI, and to the attention of then-FBI Director James Comey and then-Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok.
"The following information is provided for the exclusive use of your bureau for background investigative action or lead purposes as appropriate," the 2016 CIA memo to Comey and Strzok stated.
"This memorandum contains sensitive information that could be source revealing. It should be handled with particular attention to compartmentation and need-to-know. To avoid the possible compromise of the source, any investigative action taken in response to the information below should be coordinated in advance with Chief Counterintelligence Mission Center, Legal," the memo read. "It may not be used in any legal proceeding — including FISA applications — without prior approval …"
"Per FBI verbal request, CIA provides the below examples of information the CROSSFIRE HURRICANE fusion cell has gleaned to date," the memo continued. "An exchange [REDACTED] discussing US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning US presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering US elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server."
The memo was heavily redacted.
A source familiar with the matter told Fox News that Ratcliffe, privately, has raised concerns that the CIOL was directed to Comey and Strzok.
Fox News, at this point, has not obtained evidence to suggest the FBI opened an investigation into Clinton’s plan per the CIA referral.
Meanwhile, Ratcliffe had also declassified documents that revealed former CIA Director John Brennan briefed then- President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s purported "proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service."
"We’re getting additional insight into Russian activities from [REDACTED]," Brennan’s declassified notes, which were first obtained by Fox News in October 2020, read. "CITE [summarizing] alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service."
At this point, Durham has indicted three people as part of his investigation: Igor Danchenko on Nov. 4, 2021, Kevin Clinesmith in August 2020, and Michael Sussmann in September 2021.
Ratcliffe told Fox News’ "Sunday Morning Futures" on Nov. 8, 2021, that he was expecting "many indictments" out of Durham’s special counsel investigation.
Danchenko was charged with making a false statement and is accused of lying to the FBI about the source of information that he provided to Christopher Steele for the anti-Trump dossier. Kevin Clinesmith was also charged with making a false statement. Clinesmith had been referred for potential prosecution by the Justice Department' s inspector general's office, which conducted its own review of the Russia investigation.
Specifically, the inspector general accused Clinesmith, though not by name, of altering an email about Page to say that he was "not a source" for another government agency. Page has said he was a source for the CIA. The DOJ relied on that assertion as it submitted a third and final renewal application in 2017 to eavesdrop on Trump campaign aide Carter Page under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
Durham also charged former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann with making a false statement to a federal agent. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.
The indictment against Sussmann says he told then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016, less than two months before the 2016 presidential election, that he was not doing work "for any client" when he requested and held a meeting in which he presented "purported data and 'white papers' that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel" between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin.
Fox News, this weekend, first reported on Durham's filing on Feb. 11. In a section titled "Factual Background," Durham reveals that Sussmann "had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign."
Durham’s filing said Sussmann’s "billing records reflect" that he "repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations."
The filing revealed that Sussmann and the Tech Executive had met and communicated with another law partner, who was serving as general counsel to the Clinton campaign. Sources told Fox News that lawyer is Marc Elias, who worked at the law firm Perkins Coie.
Elias’ law firm, Perkins Coie, is the firm that the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign funded the anti-Trump dossier through. The unverified dossier was authored by ex-British Intelligence agent Christopher Steele and commissioned by opposition research firm Fusion GPS.
Meanwhile, Durham's latest filing states that in July 2016, the tech executive worked with Sussmann, a U.S. investigative firm retained by Law Firm 1 on behalf of the Clinton campaign, numerous cyber researchers and employees at multiple internet companies to "assemble the purported data and white papers."
"In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data," the filing states. "Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract."
"Tech Executive-1 tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish 'an inference' and 'narrative' tying then-candidate Trump to Russia," Durham states. "In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain 'VIPs,' referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton campaign."
Durham also writes that during Sussmann's trial, the government will establish that among the Internet data Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited was domain name system (DNS) internet traffic pertaining to "(i) a particular healthcare provider, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump's Central Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executive Office of the President of the United States (EOP)."
Durham states that the internet company that Tech Executive-1 worked for "had come to access and maintain dedicated servers" for the Executive Office of the President as "part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the EOP."
"Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP's DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump," Durham states.
The filing also reveals that Sussmann provided "an updated set of allegations" including the Russian bank data, and additional allegations relating to Trump "to a second agency of the U.S. government" in 2017.
Durham says the allegations "relied, in part, on the purported DNS traffic" that Tech Executive-1 and others "had assembled pertaining to Trump Tower, Donald Trump's New York City apartment building, the EOP, and the aforementioned healthcare provider."
The CROSSFIRE HURRICANE counterintelligence investigation that Trump calls a WITCH HUNT to this day?
The memo is from 2016 and the counterintelligence investigation ended in 2017.
Again, WHERE are the indictments?
Are you claiming that Dan Coats hid this 'revelation' from the Trump DOJ?
Did Radcliff hide it from the Trump DOJ, including Durham?
BTFW, what law do you claim that Clinton violated? I'll wait.
The CROSSFIRE HURRICANE counterintelligence investigation was actually based exclusively on media reports that ended up being false to “assesses that, following Page’s meetings in Russia, Page helped influence [the Republican Party] and Trump’s campaign to alter their platforms to be more sympathetic to Russia.” The FBI also falsified a FISA request which failed to mention that Carter Page worked for the CIA.
Is that what you are talking about?
I'll wait.
No Vic, I'm talking about the Crossfire Hurricane as correctly described by the DOJ OIG:
Now, instead of deflecting, how about answering the questions I asked you Vic.
You know that a counter-intelligence investigation needs no pretext and that is why the corrupt FBI did it that way.
Here is the IG's finding (which many found wanting):
"The long-awaited report from Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz was released as expected on Monday. Also as expected, the 400-page report said that the origins of the FBI’s Russia investigation ultimately had a proper and legal factual basis — despite numerous procedural shortcomings at the bureau, and despite a criminal referral related to low-level ex-FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith’s alleged alteration of an email used in an application to surveil former Trump adviser Carter Page .
The bottom line: it’s a mixed bag and there was some strong scolding of the FBI’s failures–“We are deeply concerned that so many basic and fundamental errors were made by three separate, hand-picked investigative teams...
I hope you aren't going to waste our time giving us the liberal interpretation of the Horowitz investigation. We are now at a point where people are cooperating and we may see indictments. That is the topic here. Hilary Clinton has now been tied to spying on a sitting President. John Durham has been looking into the origins of the Russia/collusion investigation (that was in addition to Crossfire Hurricane) for the better part of 3 years. I don't know where it's leading but I can assure you that as soon as the Republicans take over congress, there will be a widening investigation.
Thank you so much for making my point in such a glaring way Vic.
What you claim is the 'IG's finding' is actually the OPINION from a Fox 'News' Media reporter.
While you and yours are more than willing to regurgitate unvetted and uninformed bullshit from admittedly bias sources, some of us actually READ the information an come to our own conclusions.
You've already wasted enough of 'our' time with the Trumpist interpretation Vic.
You have been saying that we were about to see indictments for a year or more Vic. Your seed doesn't say anything about 'people cooperating'. People have been subpoenaed and testified before a grand jury LAST YEAR.
Why do you believe that Vic? Isn't your hero doing a good job?
Trump's reaction
Former President Trump reacted to the filing on Saturday evening, saying Durham’s filing "provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia."
"This is a scandal far greater in scope and magnitude than Watergate and those who were involved in and knew about this spying operation should be subject to criminal prosecution," Trump said.
Trump added: "In addition, reparations should be paid to those in our country who have been damaged by this."
Oh and btw, time to retire Leslie!
I suspect Durham is saving the best for last.
The small fruit gives testimony and leads the way to the bigger players.
It sucks being them!
btw
FIRST ON FOX: Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation has "accelerated," and more people are "cooperating" and coming before the federal grand jury than has previously been reported, a source familiar with the probe told Fox News.
uh oh .... Chongo!
All lies
The lies were what the msm perpetuated for 5 years.
This story is being torn apart on morning joe this morming. Not a surprise. Durham's reputation is shot to hell.
We all know what the narrative is going to be. The New York Times is already twisting and turning. Mike McIntire, who pretends to be a reporter, expressed no interest in the findings. Another Times activist is telling us to keep in mind that Clinton is not named in the court document. Most of the leftist media is intent on ignoring the story.
Those two asshats know jack-squat in regards to this case. That said, neither do you or I. How about we wait until the investigation is over to decide? But hanging your hat on what those two are saying?
Absolutely ridiculous!
The moron in chief weighed in recently
Ya, Trump was right again, as usual.
Now we know were all the leaks came from. At least the few factual leaks.
The it guy and a couple of her campaign folks flipped on her. She will be housed next to the unibomber and el chapo.